[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190322205500.GP12472@zn.tnic>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 21:55:00 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: "Ghannam, Yazen" <Yazen.Ghannam@....com>
Cc: "linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"tony.luck@...el.com" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"rafal@...ecki.pl" <rafal@...ecki.pl>,
"clemej@...il.com" <clemej@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] x86/MCE/AMD: Don't report L1 BTB MCA errors on
some Family 17h models
On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 08:37:08PM +0000, Ghannam, Yazen wrote:
> Sorry, I forgot to mention this. I went with "filter_mce_amd" because
> amd_filter_mce() is already defined in edac/mce_amd.c and there was
> a conflict when building. Is there another way to avoid these naming
> conflicts?
Yuck, we're clearly filtering too much. :)
So let's rename that amd_filter_mce() to something else since it is
static and only used in that file. Maybe something like
if (ignore_mce(m))
return NOTIFY_STOP;
so that we can keep the "filter" notion all reserved to the core MCA
code and there's no confusion.
And then amd_filter_mce() is free to be used in the core code.
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists